全曜財經資訊股份有限公司

1. NT$15,000 annual travel allowance, NT$6,000 education allowance, and allowances for some activities. There is also a separate monthly subsidy for club expenses.

2. The company has a retirement benefits fund. Each month, a portion is deducted from your salary, and the company contributes an additional 50% to purchase shares as a long-term retention benefit.

3. The company has systems for training, code reviews, annual evaluations, and PIPs.

4. The company has also adopted AI to a very high degree. AI is widely used in meetings, discussions, business, marketing, project planning, and work involving the front end, back end, and art. For those hoping to build experience using AI tools, this may be somewhat appealing.

5. The company has many diverse projects, allowing you to accumulate experience quickly.

The performance evaluations of a foreign company, with the benefits of a Taiwanese company.

1. Salaries are relatively low, and the salary ceiling is also fairly limited, with little room for growth. The company has now canceled its automatic salary adjustment system. Employees must instead actively submit an application, undergo an evaluation, communicate with their manager, and have the request reported upward before there is any “possibility” of a raise.

2. Bonuses are also limited, consisting mainly of a guaranteed one-month year-end bonus and NT$1,000 for each of the three major holidays. The contract also contains clauses related to the year-end bonus—that is, the company may choose not to pay it.

3. The subsidies mentioned among the advantages all come with various caveats and restrictions.

A. For example, travel must be taken together with colleagues, and you have to take photos, write a reflection, and so on...

B. The retirement benefits fund requires you to stay for five full years. If you leave early, you must repay a proportionate amount according to the regulations (can you really stay for five years @@?).

C. The education subsidy is limited to subjects related to the company’s business and your own job functions. Language-related books cannot be claimed, and in some cases you also need to explain to your manager why you are buying them.

4. The interview process is extremely lengthy. The entire process may usually take more than a month. After finally making it to the last stage, you may laugh when you see the salary they offer in light of their requirements.

5. Probationary period: New hires have a three-month probationary period, including two months of training.

The recruitment process does not provide a particularly sufficient explanation of how the probationary period actually works.

A. Candidates are not informed of the evaluation criteria. They only learn some of the actual evaluation methods from the department afterward.

B. Some evaluations involve deliberately making unreasonable requests to observe whether new hires raise questions. Asking too many questions may make them think you lack ability, while asking too few may make them think you have not correctly understood the requirements.

C. The standards and explanations may differ between evaluators, making it difficult for new hires to understand the actual evaluation criteria.

D. In addition, the training content may differ from the department to which you are ultimately assigned, and different business units have their own ways of working. As a result, new hires may still need to readjust after entering their actual department.

6. There are evaluations every year, and the company places considerable importance on schedules, coding standards, and various requirements. Employees must continue meeting the evaluation criteria over the long term. There is also a system in which colleagues evaluate one another, and the overall experience is not very positive. In addition, quite a few of the managers, senior employees, and PMs I encountered frequently worked overtime, so the overall work pressure is not particularly low.

7. The company’s organizational structure is mainly divided into “business units” and “departments.”

Business units are primarily responsible for actual business operations, including product development and customer development, and are somewhat similar in nature to independent subsidiaries.

Departments are primarily responsible for internal personnel management, such as attendance, performance evaluations, and training.

The problem is that communication and coordination between business units and departments are not particularly smooth, and their goals or requirements may sometimes be inconsistent.

In my own case, I often encountered situations where something was allowed by the department but not by the business unit.

The business unit thought something was acceptable, but the department thought it needed improvement.

8. The company’s current level of AI adoption is extremely high.

It is no longer just engineers using AI to assist with programming. AI is now heavily involved in everything from meetings, discussions, business, marketing, and project planning to front-end, back-end, and art work.

New hires need to be particularly aware that if they rely heavily on AI-generated output over the long term, they may become very good at using AI without their own engineering abilities growing at the same pace. This issue may be less significant for people who already have experience, but for those just entering the industry, I believe it is a risk worth noting.

Moreover, the positioning of the company’s engineering department also seems to be gradually changing. In the past, engineers were mainly responsible for development. Recently, however, some new projects have begun to be developed by people without engineering backgrounds using Vibe Coding, while engineers instead have to spend more time handling subsequent integration, fixes, and maintenance. From the company’s operational perspective, this may improve efficiency, but from the perspective of engineers’ career development, I am not sure this is a good thing.

As for the work culture, my personal assessment is relatively negative. As AI has been introduced, the company’s overall focus seems to be gradually shifting from the engineering department toward the PM and marketing departments. Quite a few of the PMs and marketing staff I know work overtime, and some marketing employees even have to take on additional business-related work.

Recently, quite a few senior employees have also left the company, including through layoffs, unpaid leave, and voluntary resignation. Both newer and older employees are among those who have left.

Taken together, these circumstances have made me even less confident in the company’s long-term stability.

9. Technically, I believe some older projects also have fairly obvious problems. Some projects have accumulated a very long history of code and modifications. With different people making changes at different times, combined with the addition of AI in recent years, some of the code has become highly complex. Such projects have relatively high costs for understanding and subsequent maintenance.

10. In summary, I believe job seekers need to pay particular attention to several issues: limited salary growth, considerable work pressure, the need to face evaluations over the long term, and whether the company’s direction will further affect their skill set and career competitiveness.

If you are looking for a stable job that you can keep until retirement, I would recommend carefully evaluating this company.

If you are a recent graduate, I recommend it even less. The main reason is that the company has adopted AI extensively. I am concerned that after staying here for a long time, new hires may become very familiar with AI tools while accumulating less practical engineering ability than they might expect.

The benefits are okay.

Frequent changes in decision-making: The company’s direction is often significantly adjusted within a short period—for example, overturning existing policies multiple times within a year. This environment requires employees to be highly adaptable, but it can also create a sense that there is a lack of long-term planning.

Gap between management and frontline employees: Some senior executives have a limited understanding of frontline work, yet publicly criticize employees in meetings and may even involve colleagues outside their direct reporting lines. At the same time, there is often a discrepancy between external messaging and actual implementation, which can negatively affect team morale.

Intense internal competition: There is a noticeable atmosphere of factions or internal conflict within the company. If a manager undergoes a personnel change, team members may also be affected.

Gap between communication and commitments: Some managers verbally express their willingness to provide support, but when problems arise, they shift responsibility back to frontline employees and may even later deny the employees’ efforts. This is something to pay particular attention to.

Overall, the company’s organizational culture is relatively unstable and may suit people who can adapt quickly and handle pressure well. However, if you value well-established systems, long-term development, or a stable environment, you may find it less suitable.

Attribution: A neutral and gentle version polished by ChatGPT

The benefits are decent.

Don’t waste your time interviewing!

Although the benefits are good, the company always spends big to hire experienced people, then lays them off after the project ends, saying they’re no longer needed.

The Engineering and Marketing departments are pretty much the same.... If you don’t want to ruin your résumé, don’t go. There aren’t many long-term employees left; most are newcomers who have been there less than a year.

There is severe infighting and factionalism among senior management. If your manager happens to leave, there’s a very high chance the people under them will be let go as well. They’ll give you the same reason: they’re temporarily not needed.

1. Remote interview, efficient

2. In the early stages of the interview process, I interviewed with several Members in the same role. They all seemed nice and easy to get along with, and the technical discussions were in-depth and harmonious.

3. Fortunately, I was not hired; otherwise, I might have had to work with a very poor manager, which would probably have been painful.

1. There was a logic test completely unrelated to the job responsibilities. It felt like taking an aptitude-class test from my student days. Some of the questions were also ambiguous. I had previously worked in the same role at other companies for more than ten years, and in my experience, taking this test was entirely unnecessary.

2. An arrogant engineering manager—apparently a CTO or director—interviewed me and responded to the test mentioned above. He relentlessly focused on one or two questions I got wrong due to carelessness or unclear wording, and his attitude was extremely arrogant and completely disrespectful. It can be inferred that the test mentioned above was probably his proud creation.

3. This company is unusual in that it uses its own internally developed framework for development. Such a decision can cause the codebase to diverge progressively from the development and updates of native libraries and native languages, easily leading to numerous problems and technical debt over time. I privately speculate that this decision also came from that manager. If the company cannot correct this kind of misguided decision internally, it could easily lead to large-scale conflict and talent departures.

4. Later, I saw that every team was recruiting a Team Lead. Perhaps this was the result of what I speculated above, while the owner or senior management continued to listen to the wrong people and allowed the company to persist with misguided policies and poor communication practices.

- The interview process and notification were fast

- Questions were answered during the interview

I previously interviewed for an engineering position and felt very disrespected throughout the process. Regardless of my experience, background, or portfolio, they insisted on testing obscure knowledge that would never be used, and did not discuss anything else.

During the Q&A session, I asked about the job responsibilities and duties. Neither the interviewer nor the manager could provide any answers. They acted as if the position had been open year-round and that it was entirely up to you whether you wanted to come, and as if they would simply send you wherever there happened to be a staffing shortage.

None

Soon after my first week,

the person training me started yelling loudly:

“Your values are not a good fit for our company.

You should think carefully about whether you want to get lost.”

“What on earth are you talking about? Why don’t you listen to yourself?”

What I’m sharing here is about the team I was in; I’m less familiar with the other teams.

As for the interview process, it was more or less the same as the previous accounts. My experience at the time was also about the same—I just didn’t expect it to still be like this now.

If you are:

* Junior

* This is very suitable for honing your skills. I believe you can learn quite a lot here, whether in communication, requirements discussions, system design, or other areas.

* You can ask questions whenever you have them (whether technical or about the team’s history), and the experienced members are all very enthusiastic about answering and teaching.

* Senior

* I think you will probably find it painful. You’ll discover that there is some disorder, although things are gradually moving in a better direction.

* If you want to take on the challenge of changing the environment, I believe there are many opportunities here to do so.

1. The atmosphere in my team is harmonious. You can freely put forward your views, and the members will listen and discuss them.

2. Team members are all happy to share new knowledge and technologies.

* In some situations, the team allows projects to try using those technologies.

3. The new Leaders have been working on solving the company’s current systemic problems.

* The results won’t be immediate, but at least things are slowly moving forward bit by bit.

4. The team members are all fairly young. Usually, people joke around with one another, which is quite fun, and my Leader is also very friendly.

5. The team is gradually solving systemic problems and improving the development experience.

* Just a note: the development experience is all iterated on by people. QQ

6. Experienced members do their best to shield newcomers from the meteorites.

* If the experienced person shielding you from meteorites leaves, please be sure to thank them—the pressure is really significant.

* Not every hero wears a cape. All-caps RESPECT.

7. You can transfer to a different team and pursue the direction you want to develop in.

* However, based on what I’ve seen, I haven’t really seen anyone transfer teams. Usually, more people transfer to another company.

Overall, I quite like the team I was in, but I can’t really speak for the others.

1. Potential problems are left for later, to be resolved when they occur.

2. There are many, many meteorites * n.

3. The organizational structure changes very quickly; sometimes it changes and you won’t even know.

4. The infrastructure is unstable.

5. The service domains are very complex, and there is no good documentation management system for passing on knowledge of these domains.

* If a document hasn’t been updated in a long time, please still refer to it—it might be useful (at least you can still see it instead of getting Not Found).

* If you have an experienced person you can ask, ask them directly. That person might not be around anymore tomorrow.

6. The price of having young team members is that there aren’t many long-timers.

* “Long-timer”: someone who has been in the team for more than n years. If you meet someone like this, cherish them—they’re practically a living historical document.

* n: This varies by team. In some teams it is 5, in others 3, and in some even 1.

7. It’s very easy to get patted on the head and placated.

8. Although we supposedly run Scrum, I don’t feel like we’re moving in small, fast steps. There are many “Scrum Buts.”

9. The distribution of job levels is extremely unclear (as are promotions and so on). If you care a lot about job levels, you will find this very painful.

10. Each team has many headcount openings, but they can never seem to hire enough people.

* After seeing everyone’s accounts, I can understand why.

11. Turnover is very high. If the person next to you is gone tomorrow, don’t be surprised.

* To emphasize again: cherish the experienced members. One day together is one day.

12. If you have a choice of products and projects, please think carefully about which one you want.

13. There are very few Seniors. Although they are hiring, they always seem to be running at a deficit.

None

If you approach the interview as an experience, you can experience the worst kind.

You waste 30 minutes filling out a questionnaire before the interview,

then another 30 minutes writing answers during the interview,

and another 30 minutes answering questions that have absolutely nothing to do with the job,

while the interviewer has clearly never looked at the questionnaire responses.

They only know how to conduct interviews using the company-provided, outdated, lousy questions,

yet they still expect to find highly useful talent. What a joke.

The supervisor asked many questions related to Swift.

They really are looking for Swift professionals.

In addition, they asked many questions unrelated to iOS development (interests, finance, management).

The company probably has diverse business development activities, so employees may potentially be assigned to other roles in the future.

The actual salary offered is cut quite low; I only recommend that newcomers apply for an interview.

There is a mutual evaluation system, so you need to be able to withstand the pressure.

The supervisor asked many Swift-related questions

They are genuinely looking for professionals with Swift expertise

They also asked many questions unrelated to iOS development (interests, finance, management)

This is probably because the company is developing business in multiple areas. In the future, employees may potentially be assigned to other roles.

The actual salary offered is cut very low; I only recommend that newcomers apply for an interview

There is a mutual evaluation system, so you need to be able to withstand the pressure

Newly renovated office

Suitable for recent graduates or office workers who don’t mind accepting low pay to gain experience

Regardless of the position you apply for (including part-time roles), there are two interviews held on different days, a written test, and three rounds to pass (department, HR, and CEO).

If you’re interested in applying, I suggest first learning about the company’s three core values and 15 guidelines. They aren’t listed on 104, so you’ll need to check the company’s official website yourself. Consider whether a company with so many rules offers compensation proportional to what you can negotiate.

The benefits listed on 104 are for reference only, so don’t expect too much. Most of the benefits related to money look available on paper but are difficult to actually receive.

There may be salary cuts during the interview process, and after joining, there may also be reasons given for not raising your pay to your expected level. Year-end bonuses are also unstable.

Each department has its own character. Some are lifeless, while others feel like palace intrigue dramas. Cross-departmental work can sometimes involve everyone doing their own thing and information not being shared.

Twice a year, the company has a mutual evaluation system involving supervisors and colleagues. Newly hired employees should be cautious when giving ratings. It uses a percentile-ranking system, so don’t assume the world is kind and perfect—avoid exchanging sincerity for heartlessness.

This is a company with a high turnover rate. The year I joined, it had nearly 300 employees. I worked there for about three years, and when I left, I checked the employee numbers and found that being short by fewer than ten employees would have been enough to place the company among the top 100 companies by current headcount. That ratio is provided for everyone’s reference.

The atmosphere among colleagues is pretty good, although you occasionally hear people arguing.

The sit-stand desks are nice.

There are large and small desks, so there is plenty of desktop space overall.

The seating areas have tall partitions, providing relatively good privacy.

1. The interview process is too long

Engineer -> Manager -> HR Manager -> CEO

The entire interview process took more than a month, and the CEO conducted a stress interview.

2. They arbitrarily cut salaries

I had been a loyal user of the 籌碼K線 app for nearly ten years. In addition, because the economy had been poor recently, I had already accepted a 20% salary reduction during the interview in order to receive the offer.

During my second week, I was called in and told that my salary would have to be reduced by another approximately 30%. In fact, it was almost the same as an entry-level salary....

I was given a second pay cut before I had even had any exposure to the company's business, cross-departmental collaboration, meetings, and so on.

It was simply because the manager thought I was not worth that amount of money (this was my first time discussing work with this manager).

The company is said to recommend hiring only people from AppWork.

But, speaking honestly, I also would not particularly recommend that people from AppWork join this company... there is limited opportunity to learn.

3. The documentation contains incorrect information

The company has been around for 20 years and has more than 300 employees, yet its documentation is put together like that of a startup....

3-1. The onboarding document provided by HR said that new hires could contact a certain HR representative if they had any problems, as she was responsible for handling such matters.

When I asked that HR representative about the procedure for resigning as a new hire, I was told that someone else handled it and that it was outside her scope.

Later, another HR representative came to explain the relevant procedure to me and said not to contact the HR representative named in the document about this kind of matter.

3-2.

Most of the links in the department's technical documentation return 404 errors. The explanations and code in the technical documentation do not match the actual code.

It is better to look directly at the samples; reading the documentation will mislead you.

I only stayed for three weeks to test the waters. What I experienced was consistent with articles from five or six years ago on Tianyancha and PTT, and I also encountered quite a few ridiculous situations. Fortunately, I escaped after three weeks. Thank God.

HR is fairly easy to talk to.

I was interviewing for an intern position, but they made it seem like a managerial role. I had to fill out two questionnaires first, then interview with the manager and HR, and finally even interview with the CEO, wasting a full three weeks of my time. I really don't understand why there are so many steps in the process.

1. The HR staff have a very good attitude.

2. The office is very new and beautiful.

1. They have a lot of complicated application procedures and seem very intent on observing your personality traits, potential, and qualifications.

In reality, they just look at whether the answers you give in the final interview are what the CEO wants to hear. He talks, and he alone decides whether you are a good fit.

2. There is no point in preparing carefully for the interview. As described in point 1, the key to getting hired is determined there. Believe me.

3. The salary for the position I applied for was listed as 40–55, but the talent they are looking for is clearly worth much more than that. No wonder so many people say their salary offers are very low. They expect to get a good horse without feeding it—a classic case of wanting high-quality talent while refusing to pay for it.

4. Low salary, overly subjective judgments about people's words and actions, and a complicated, lengthy application process. No wonder the position has been open for so long without many people applying.

I strongly recommend not wasting your time applying unless you are 100% certain that the CEO will like your answers. Otherwise, even if the other managers recognize your abilities, you still will not get in.

After a major change in the company's senior management, engineers' salaries increased significantly.

The systems have also improved considerably.

Finally, there are no longer all sorts of frustrating situations, such as having self-initiated salary increases rejected for two consecutive quarters.

The atmosphere among colleagues is very good.

Apart from the Engineering department, where the arrival of two new managers has led to significant improvements, the other departments do not appear to have improved noticeably. It feels like the company does not handle initiatives in a coordinated, organization-wide manner.

Charitable work, super nice colleagues, and the managers are also really great

The training for new hires is very thorough

The salary is lower than the market average

They promote proposing your own raise, but you also have to participate in peer evaluations. You can propose a raise only if your “relative” rating is 50% higher than everyone else’s for “two consecutive” quarters.

If your “relative” rating is below 20%, the boss will call you in and say they’re going to fire you.

P.S. Peer evaluations include new hires too (new hire: fuck)

The interviewers were quite friendly and answered every question.

I interviewed for a backend development position.

1. The remote interview process was extremely lengthy. First, an engineer interviewed me for half an hour and asked some questions similar to those in introductory computer science courses. After working for many years, I had long forgotten this material, and asking about it was not very useful. The second round involved a coding assignment to be submitted within a week. After I submitted it, they then asked me to fill out a large number of personality-survey-like questionnaires. The third round was a half-hour test containing some simple math and verbal logic questions. Finally, there was an interview with the manager.

2. There are many negative reviews of the interview process online. During the interview, I asked how they viewed this issue, but unexpectedly they responded by asking me directly, “What do you think?” I did not hear their response instead. The interview process itself was quite friendly, but I found their unwillingness to answer the question rather strange.

3. The interview process took more than two weeks, and I ultimately received no response. I felt this was very disrespectful.

The HR representative was extremely pleasant.

1. The written test questions were all unrelated to the position being applied for (at the end, they will ask you to sign a confidentiality agreement).

2. During the Q&A, the supervisor deliberately probes into your past, which can make you feel very uncomfortable.

3. If you pass the interview, you will need to go through a second interview and a final interview. The first interview is with the position supervisor, the second is with the head of HR, and the final one is with the boss.

The interview process may be extended by more than a day (in terms of the total actual time).

4. If you pass the first interview, HR will ask you to provide references before the second interview begins. This means they need to contact your supervisor at your former company. If you are unwilling to provide one, they will ask you to provide a university professor’s email address instead. As a result, you will have to notify your former company or university professor that such a reference check will take place, which can feel like a significant waste of time.

During the interview process, only the meeting with HR was relatively pleasant. In other respects, the experience could make you feel very uncomfortable.

None

There were many tests, and I felt that many of them were unrelated to the job.

However, after going through multiple stages, the final result was just a short thank-you letter.

I feel that the interview process could actually be much shorter

and need not take up so much time for both the candidate and the interviewer.

Overall, this interview process made me feel uncomfortable.

The HR representative was friendly.

1. Before the interview, you have to fill out many questions, such as giving six examples of traits you admire in a person you look up to. After finishing, you don't know what it was for.

2. During the interview, you have to complete a test. The questions are about arithmetic and Newton's three laws of motion, which are completely unrelated to the position, and they don't explain how these subjects would be applied.

3. The interviewing manager just writes in a small notebook while asking for your opinions on how the position and products could be improved. They make no effort to engage in a discussion with you. After analyzing everything, they only tell you that you understand the company's products very well, without explaining what the position involves. It feels like they are asking interviewees to provide optimization ideas.

4. In the end, I only received a response saying that I was merely a temporary choice and had not been selected. I was completely stunned.

Summary: You write a lot of things unrelated to the job, essentially providing free suggestions for improvement.

Unknown

After notifying me about the interview, they had me fill out three full forms containing bizarre questions, such as: What is talent? What is hard work? There were more than ten questions in total. Then, on the evening before the scheduled interview, they called to tell me that I no longer needed to attend because the company had found a suitable candidate. I had already taken time off work—this was a complete waste of a job seeker's time!

The colleagues are all nice—it's the little things that make you happy.

1. Salary adjustment range—There are no clear rules; it depends on the department and on whether you know how to curry favor.

2. Learning opportunities—It's a one-person show, and new ideas aren't readily accepted.

3. Internal company politics are quite serious; even when you compete for resources, you still can't get them.

4. Aside from the Institutional Department, the other departments have very little structure.

5. Some departments have a dull atmosphere.

6. Overtime is extremely common in the Marketing Department (you have to stay at the company for things like seminar livestreams, but the company livestreams and holds seminars every day).

7. You can probably leave after working there for about a year.

8. Although it's supposedly a financial information company, generally speaking, employees' financial knowledge is lacking; everyone only looks at the short term.

The team I worked in was relatively highly dynamic within the company.

It’s quite good for newcomers.

It offers a decent starting salary (for bachelor’s degree holders) and high-quality onboarding training.

As long as you have a solid foundation from university,

it is definitely a good environment to help you transition into the workplace.

However, there is a ceiling on salary and technical growth.

Within two or three years, you’ll need to reconsider your future.